Jews Down Underhttps://jewsdownunder.com
An online magazine for Australian JewsMon, 13 Aug 2018 15:06:32 +0000en-AUhourly1https://wordpress.org/?v=4.9.8https://jewsdownunder.com/wp-content/uploads/cropped-Original-Logo-32x32.jpgJews Down Underhttps://jewsdownunder.com
323269008043Baroness Tonge implies discussing persecution of Jews is antisemitic.https://jewsdownunder.com/2018/08/14/baroness-tonge-implies-discussing-persecution-of-jews-is-antisemitic/
https://jewsdownunder.com/2018/08/14/baroness-tonge-implies-discussing-persecution-of-jews-is-antisemitic/#respondMon, 13 Aug 2018 14:59:25 +0000https://jewsdownunder.com/?p=23172In a Facebook post yesterday, Baroness Jenny Tonge stated “…We would all like a safe haven to run to when the going gets tough, but we stay on and ask why it is getting tough. Why have the Jewish people been persecuted over and over again throughout history. Why? I never get an answer. If …

“…We would all like a safe haven to run to when the going gets tough, but we stay on and ask why it is getting tough. Why have the Jewish people been persecuted over and over again throughout history. Why? I never get an answer. If we discussed this we would be accused of anti Semitism, so better not, and so it goes on!…”

Tonge’s post was responding to a video produced by The Israel Institute of New Zealand in which a Jewish Kiwi, Juliet Moses, presents a brief history of the Jewish homeland, affirms the indigeneity of the Jewish people and outlines the involvement of the United Nations in Israel’s establishment.

It is preposterous to imply that discussion of why Jews have been persecuted in itself should be considered antisemitic. This is a question historians and scholars, among others, have grappled with throughout the ages. However, it IS antisemitic to suggest that Jews are persecuted because they bring it upon themselves, just as it would be to suggest that any other people of a particular race, ethnicity or religion, deserve bigotry, discrimination or persecution, and that they are to blame, not the perpetrators.

Blaming Jews for antisemitism is something Baroness Tonge has done before. In February, 2017, she suggested that a record number of antisemitic incidents was because the Jewish community did not speak out enough against Israel. Mark Gardner, CST director of communications, said Baroness Tonge’s comments “typifies how Israel hatred causes some on the anti-racist liberal left to wilfully ignore, pervert and ridicule the concerns of British and world Jewry about antisemitism.” Her “victim mentality” jibe was “repulsive”, he said.

Only one month earlier she was interviewed on J-TV and referred to the “Israeli lobby”, suggesting that there was unacceptable funding of Israel’s cause. When asked if she really believed that secret funds were being used to pay British politicians by pro-Israeli groups, she replied that..

“I’m making the allegation and asking people to prove [to] me that I’m wrong… it’s up to the lobby to clear their own name.” She did admit “that’s a good point” when the interviewer pointed out that the UK legal system was based on innocence until proven guilty.

With such a history of blaming Jews for attacks on them, perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised by her most recent Facebook post. However, the fact that she hasn’t even bothered to try to couch it in (thinly disguised) terms that demonise Israel or purport to be concerned with advocating for Palestinians, makes it even more shocking.

“Antisemitism means denying the right of Jews to exist collectively as Jews with the same rights as everyone else. It takes different forms in different ages. In the Middle Ages, Jews were hated because of their religion. In the nineteenth and early twentieth century they were hated because of their race. Today they are hated because of their nation state, the state of Israel. It takes different forms but it remains the same thing: the view that Jews have no right to exist as free and equal human beings.”Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks

]]>https://jewsdownunder.com/2018/08/14/baroness-tonge-implies-discussing-persecution-of-jews-is-antisemitic/feed/023172Life in Israel Under Fire.https://jewsdownunder.com/2018/08/13/life-in-israel-under-fire/
https://jewsdownunder.com/2018/08/13/life-in-israel-under-fire/#respondMon, 13 Aug 2018 04:59:03 +0000https://jewsdownunder.com/?p=23168After a night of missiles on the south of Israel (last Wednesday), I got up to a new day, full of missiles. My nerves were frazzled. But why? Nothing happened to me. At night I had reset the RED ALERT app so that it wouldn’t alert me of all the missiles on my country, it …

]]>After a night of missiles on the south of Israel (last Wednesday), I got up to a new day, full of missiles.

My nerves were frazzled. But why? Nothing happened to me. At night I had reset the RED ALERT app so that it wouldn’t alert me of all the missiles on my country, it would only sound the alarm if missiles came to Haifa.

Only.

I allowed myself the luxury of sleep – something the people of southern Israel did not have. Everyone who lives in proximity to Gaza has safe rooms in their homes but can you really sleep when you have to move your entire family into one room and you hear sirens and explosions around you all night long? Can you sleep knowing that the Iron Dome missile defense system works most of the time but not always? It knocks most of Hamas rockets out of the sky but no system is perfect, sometimes it misses and every missile interception means the missile explodes in the air, dropping boiling hot shrapnel from the sky. Wherever it hits, it hits.

What right do I have to have frazzled nerves?! Watching your people suffer is not the same as suffering yourself.

I cry when my friend in Be’eri tells me how hard it is for her to breathe because of the arson terrorism. The smoke permeates the air, so much so that she needs to use an asthma inhalator, something she hasn’t had to do for years.

I lived through one day of arson terrorism and I will never forget the fear and the choking stench of the smoke. She has lived through months of it, with no end in sight. I cry but it is she, not me, who is having a hard time breathing. It is she, not me, who is worried about the long-term health damage to her family, constantly breathing air that, to some extent or another, depending on the whims of Hamas and the direction of the wind, is poisoned.

The images racing through my head were scenes we have seen too many times before – wives saying goodbye to men, going off to war. Mothers, trying not to show too much emotion when they watch their men walk away, not wanting to burden the men, trying to not frighten their children.

The media doesn’t show the other images, of the military personnel knocking on the door to notify families that their beloved son, brother, husband will never come home again. I know what those scenes are like… enough bereaved parents told me what they experienced.

That terrible phrase that sounds so innocuous to people who don’t know Israelis. That phrase that makes those who are naturally flamboyant, fast and loud become quiet and serious: “It wasn’t an easy thing…”

The worse the situation is, the less dramatic Israelis will be. “It wasn’t an easy thing…” comes before descriptions of what it is like to try to administer first aid to your friend as they bleed to death in your arms. Or returning to consciousness after a bomb goes off and seeing the pieces of your friends strewn all over the place….

I don’t want to hear those words. I don’t want to see Israelis quiet or somber.

We all know the war is coming. It’s only a question of when. We actually had thought it was going to happen earlier but whatever is happening behind the scenes on the political level is keeping the attacks on a low flame rather than a full-blown war.

I don’t envy our Prime Minister. Whatever decision he makes, lives are at stake. Israelis are suffering now, how many will suffer later?

The seemingly indecisive political maneuvering, again and again agreeing to terms dictated by a terrorist organization is sickening. We all know this weakens us in the long term, emboldening our enemies. On the other hand, we know the IDF can beat Hamas – the problem is, what happens after? Who takes over Gaza? What happens with Iran in the north? We all know that the current situation is terribly wrong but who knows how to fix it?

We have one son who is an Officer in the IDF. His base is in the south. He says that he is ok and has a proper shelter to go to when missiles rain down but who can promise us that he will get to shelter in time?

His younger brother gave a year of his life in pre-military voluntary service (which does not count as part of his military service). Soon he too will be inducted into the IDF but, if the war starts now / soon / in the next weeks / months, he will be in training and not be in combat.

His friends will. It is their parents, not us, who will be on edge every time the phone rings, every time they see a military vehicle close to their house and if, God forbid, they see soldiers walking up to their door, unannounced.

On Thursday, I walked next to the beach in Haifa. It’s summer and many families came to relax and swim. This is what people should be doing on a hot summer day – not huddling in a bomb shelter, waiting for the next explosion.

We all knew that it wasn’t likely that missiles would come raining down on us. Not that day. What will happen tomorrow? Who knows?

]]>https://jewsdownunder.com/2018/08/13/life-in-israel-under-fire/feed/023168From Israel: An Unholy and Ugly Mess.https://jewsdownunder.com/2018/08/13/from-israel-an-unholy-and-ugly-mess/
https://jewsdownunder.com/2018/08/13/from-israel-an-unholy-and-ugly-mess/#respondSun, 12 Aug 2018 23:56:53 +0000https://jewsdownunder.com/?p=23163The status quo with Hamas is intolerable and dangerous. That is the given. But we continue to operate on the cusp of war without reaching that war. Solutions are not simple and clear-cut (even as some assume they are): The way is strewn with complexities. What is required of our political leaders is the …

The status quo with Hamas is intolerable and dangerous. That is the given.

But we continue to operate on the cusp of war without reaching that war. Solutions are not simple and clear-cut (even as some assume they are): The way is strewn with complexities.

What is required of our political leaders is the courage to make some hard decisions in order to move us to greater clarity of action.

~~~~~~~~~~

At various levels, a number of nations and entities have gotten involved, and are attempting to put band aids on a situation that is festering and septic. Everyone wants to get into the act, assuming that it may yet be possible to bring about a long term “ceasefire” and then to improve the humanitarian situation in Gaza, which, they wrongly believe, will moderate Hamas. A war works against their goals, and Israel’s long-term security concerns are of absolutely no interest to them.

“Everyone” includes the EU, and the UN, Turkey, and Qatar – a devious and motley crew, none of whom we can afford to give a damn about.

Then there is Egypt, with which we do work cooperatively on various issues – al-Sisi in fact despises Hamas and is leaning on the terrorists (which is likely what caused the cessation of rocket fire late last week).

Butpressure not to hit Hamas hard is also apparently coming from the US. This makes matters more difficult.

In the end, however, Israel must do what is good for Israel. This is a lesson we should have learned long ago.

~~~~~~~~~~

Hamas claims that with the cessation of rockets last Thursday, an Egyptian-mediated “ceasefire” had come into effect.

Israel vehemently denies this, saying only that “quiet will be met with quiet.” What this suggests is that, while there is no agreement, as long as Hamas does not launch rockets we will not either. That is what the Security Cabinet meant when it gave instructions to “continue to act forcefully” against Hamas violence.

As I wrote last, this is not a tenable position: this puts Hamas in control, with Israel simply being reactive. It weakens us.

The fact that we stopped launching rockets last Thursday when Hamas did suggests that – while we formally agreed to nothing (signed nothing) – we informally were on board for that “quiet.” There is considerable criticism of this because we stopped attacking prematurely, before certain goals, such as the return of the soldiers’ bodies and the two Israeli civilians, had been achieved.

~~~~~~~~~~

The primary goal would have been an assurance of quiet in the south.

This, however, is the “quiet” that met us this past Friday and Saturday:

JNS.org

They were back at the fence, nine-thousand strong, scattered over five locations. Rioters threw firebombs and Molotov cocktails at IDF forces, and in one instance a grenade. There were several attempts to break through the fence.

Additionally, incendiary devices were launched. A HUGE kite landed on the power lines of a kibbutz, causing an outage.

Twitter.

Another device fell right next to a communal dining room yesterday and today one landed in a kibbutz avocado field and another in the Be’eri Forest.

In response we fired at the launching cells.

~~~~~~~~~~

The situation cannot, must not, continue this way.

Having stopped when we did, were we to launch rockets at Hamas now, we would be accused of “breaking a ceasefire.” As I seek to provide a posting with a professional tone, I will not share here what my response to this would be.

The residents of the south are clamoring for serious military action against Hamas. And some leaders are speaking out.

Today Agriculture Minister Uri Ariel (Habayit Hayehudi) said:

Israel National News.

“There’s no ceasefire. To our great dismay, this hasn’t ended, it’s barely started. It’s time to finish it.The diplomatic echelon needs to give the order, and the IDF will do the work.

“The Cabinet needs to tell the military echelon to bring Hamas to its knees. There needs to be defeat, not acceptance.”

Prime Minister Netanyahu hedges it, however: We will not accept anything less than a full ceasefire, he says, meaning, of course, that incendiary devices and firebombs do not constitute a “full ceasefire.”

“I will not reveal our operational plans here; they are ready. Our objective is to restore the quiet to residents of the south and the area adjacent to the Gaza Strip. This goal will be achieved in full.”

What will it take to make Netanyahu decide to actually activate those undefined “operational plans”? This is not rhetorical – it is a question of major import.

~~~~~~~~~~

What seems to me most important is that we take action that is offensive in nature: that we attack.

Several people, including some military figures, believe that targeted assassinations would be the way to go. Brig. Gen. (res.) Zvika Fogel, former head of the Southern Command, suggested the other day that it was not necessary to have a full scale war to achieve a decisive victory (emphasis added):

“The IDF and the Shin Bet have excellent intelligence. They know exactly where each of the Hamas commanders sleeps. And what we have to do is have the courage to go in and do it and then leave.

“We are a sovereign state, and a group that has not yet succeeded in establishing a state of its own is managing our daily routine for our citizens…I tell you – the IDF knows how to do these tasks, it has to get an order and execute them.”

There are other sources indicating a desire to wait until the end of 2019, when a barrier above and below ground along the entire Gaza border will be completed, before initiating a large scale military operation.

~~~~~~~~~~

If you find yourselves confused by all of this, it is not because you are missing anything: Rather, it is because there is not yet resolution on this very difficult situation.

~~~~~~~~~~

There is one other factor in play that merits mention here.

If fighting is necessary to protect the country, there is no wisdom in avoiding war. Were we to always shy from war here in the Middle East, we would be doomed. In fact, once a decision to go to war is arrived at, it should not be waged half-heartedly, for hesitation undermines.

Our troops have been well trained to go into Gaza. If it is necessary they can do it splendidly, and would be victorious in the end. Let no one think otherwise.

I am often blown away by the readiness of our young soldiers to do their part for the country. There is a social contract: they may die to protect our nation, and they accept this.

~~~~~~~~~~

But our army is a citizens’ army, and these young soldiers of 18 and 20 are our sons and grandsons, our brothers and our nephews. We are never at a remove from what happens to them. We are a small country and each of these soldiers belongs to all of us. We take their deaths to heart.

Israel Hayom

It is important, then, to strike a balance between taking action to protect the nation – bold and determined action as necessary – and not moving in a direction that excessively risks the lives of our young soldiers.

This is not often spoken of, but this reality stares us in the face at every moment.

~~~~~~~~~~

Perhaps going into Gaza now to take down Hamas IS a good idea, and important for the security of the nation. Certainly these terrorists, who represent a consummate evil and a threat, deserve to be taken down.

But we need to recognize that the human cost would be high in the tight urban spaces of Gaza City, beneath which lies a network of miles of tunnels. Some of those who advocate war in Gaza make it sound easy. It would not be easy.

Perhaps there are other ways – wise and creative ways – to manage the situation now for our country without taking on this level of risk to our soldiers.

I have mentioned just a couple of them, and there are more. There was, for example, the suggestion that the elite neighborhoods of Gaza City, which is where the leaders live, be bombed intensively for a few days.

Perhaps. Perhaps. It may be that our decision makers have trouble wrapping their heads around this, which is why we sense such confusion.

~~~~~~~~~~

I have read that Prime Minister Netanyahu will not do a major military operation in Gaza unless he is certain that the country would be supportive of this. I would not necessarily view this as a weakness or political maneuvering. Built into his hesitancy may be sensitivity to the human dimensions of war; the decision is a heavy burden.

This is just one piece of the story, but it is a piece that should be told.

“We Have Legal Grounds” –

]]>https://jewsdownunder.com/2018/08/13/from-israel-an-unholy-and-ugly-mess/feed/023163American Jews and the Democratic Party.https://jewsdownunder.com/2018/08/12/american-jews-and-the-democratic-party/
https://jewsdownunder.com/2018/08/12/american-jews-and-the-democratic-party/#respondSun, 12 Aug 2018 13:47:23 +0000https://jewsdownunder.com/?p=23159One of the vital questions facing US diaspora Jewry is how to respond to the rise of American-Left antisemitic anti-Zionism. The prominent faces of that movement include anyone who looks toward Louis Farrakhan as a positive figure in American cultural and political life. These include low hanging fruit like Linda Sarsour, Tamika Mallory, and potential …

]]>One of the vital questions facing US diaspora Jewry is how to respond to the rise of American-Left antisemitic anti-Zionism.

The prominent faces of that movement include anyone who looks toward Louis Farrakhan as a positive figure in American cultural and political life. These include low hanging fruit like Linda Sarsour, Tamika Mallory, and potential California State Assembly person, Maria Estrada… not to mention Keith Ellison, Barbara Lee, and Maxine Waters.

Given how much the Jewish community worked for the Civil Rights Movement throughout the 1950s and 1960s — up to and including sacrificing some of their children — it is a terrible shame that so many of our political enemies come from the very communities that we embraced and sought to empower throughout the twentieth-century

Nonetheless, according to 2018 Pew polling, a mere 27 percent of Democrats sympathize with Israel while 79 percent of Republicans favor the Jewish minority in the Middle East over their Arab aggressors.
This is Alan Dershowitz’s worst nightmare.

The guy devoted his life to supporting civil liberties, Israel, and the Democratic Party — not necessarily in that order — but now he’s fast becoming a relic in the minds of very many Democrats, particularly among the younger snowflake regressive set who very much dislike his ongoing support for his own people.

American Jews, and our friends, mainly respond in two ways to the rising disdain towards us within the Democratic Party. The prominent inclination is to work within. My response was to bow out. From Jimmy Carter to the first term of Barack Obama, I was a devoted man of the Left and a Democrat. But when I saw, ten years ago, now, that the Democratic Party was making a home of itself for antisemitic anti-Zionism I began to speak up. And, not surprisingly, when I spoke up I was also slapped down.

I have lost real-life friends over the fact that I refuse to stand with a political party or a political movement that supports the racist effort to boycott, divest from, and sanction (BDS) the lone, sole Jewish State.

Fred Maroun, who I have discussed before in these pages, is an interesting guy and a good friend to Israel. Like many critics of Arab political tendencies, he is of Lebanese Christian descent. Fred disagrees with me entirely. He argues, not unreasonably, that left-leaning American Jews who care about Israel need to stay and fight within the Democratic Party.

Dershowitz always argued that we should maintain a bi-partisan consensus in support of Israel and who among us would disagree with that? Of course, we want the support of all of our neighbors and friends throughout the country. But the polling data clearly shows, and from a million bits of anecdotal information, we can see that the Democratic Party is abandoning our fellow Jews in the Middle East.

27 percent are in sympathy with them.

27 percent.

That is a very difficult number for me to swallow.

I find it unreasonable and counterproductive for Jewish Americans to support the Democratic Party in figures above the 70th percentile while the Democratic Party supports Jewish well-being in numbers below the 30th percentile. Thus my argument is that we should not allow ourselves to be taken for granted and should make a get-away. Through supporting the cause of Palestinian-Arab nationalism they are throwing the Jewish people to the wolves, so who needs them?

If we can get Jewish participation in the Democratic Party down to something close to parity with the Republican Party than they can no longer take us for granted.

In the meantime, I salute our friends — Jewish and otherwise — who are working within the Democratic Party to push against the rising antisemitic anti-Zionist tide flowing over them. I am not opposed to pro-Jewish Jews working for our interests among Democrats.

I simply do not want us taken for granted by people who obviously do not care about what happens to our brothers and sisters in Israel.

]]>https://jewsdownunder.com/2018/08/12/american-jews-and-the-democratic-party/feed/023159Is Jeremy Corbyn an antisemite?https://jewsdownunder.com/2018/08/10/is-jeremy-corbyn-an-antisemite/
https://jewsdownunder.com/2018/08/10/is-jeremy-corbyn-an-antisemite/#commentsFri, 10 Aug 2018 12:24:02 +0000https://jewsdownunder.com/?p=23150The Duck test implies that a person can identify an unknown subject by observing that subject’s habitual characteristics. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is … But what if the duck is a crow† who has convinced himself that he is really a …

The Duck test implies that a person can identify an unknown subject by observing that subject’s habitual characteristics. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is …

But what if the duck is a crow† who has convinced himself that he is really a swan?

Many accuse Jeremy Corbyn of antisemitism and he certainly has left a trail of webbed footprints behind him. Yet he doesn’t see himself as a Jew Hater‡. So what is the explanation?

The current scandal with Corbyn and the wider Labour party allows Five Minutes for Israel to dive into the thinking of a worldview where being called antisemitic is defamatory but defaming the state of the Jews is practically the sine qua non for acceptance.

If not an antisemite what are some other reasonable explanations? I firmly believe that before determining conspiracy as an explanation we should we should consider incompetence as an adequate explanation*. We should also consider whether the term antisemitism has been diluted to meaningless.

Check out Corbyn’s direct approach to the Jews in the video below.

Note that he never refers to his own statements and actions/inaction, only to a few bad apples in his party. The last two sentences seem to sum up his philosophy and at least give a partial explanation.

Antisemitism, Islamophobia and far-right racism have no place in our society. That is why anti-racism is at the core of our movement.

In his own mind Corbyn can’t be an antisemite. Antisemitism is just another form of racism confined to the far-right. Far-left (as much as I loathe that term) racism, which is the problem he is supposedly explaining away, doesn’t even enter his consciousness. I don’t know if Corbyn has ever quoted the Zionism is Racism libel but I suspect the idea of a left-wing Zionist would leave him flummoxed.

The Party pointedly did decide to omit the IHRA definition that claiming that Israel’s existence is a “racist endeavour” can be considered antisemitism.

Equating antisemitism with Islamophobia and by implication any other form of racism you might like to add reduces the impact of the charge. The whitewashing (It’s all about Shami) Chakrabarti Report that Corbyn commissioned to supposedly investigate antisemitism in the party took the same tack of lumping all instances together. Ironically she recommended that Labour members should resist the use of Hitler, Nazi and Holocaust metaphors, distortions and comparisons in debates about Israel-Palestine in particular.

I swear this is a screen grab with no alteration.

Show Me Your Friends, I’ll Tell You Who You Are

Jeremy Corbyn called Hamas and Hezbollah his friends but later claimed he regretted it while giving evidence at the home affairs select committee and during a later press conference. That is, he regretted his choice of words. The meeting, not so much.

We should consider entering new terms as Proxy Jew Hatred or Accessory to Jew Hatred to our vocabulary for those who share platforms with people who don’t bother to relabel their antisemitism as criticism of Israel.

However, speaking for the defence (if that’s what I am doing) Corbyn has a long record for supporting just about every dictator and murderer who labelled himself revolutionary.

Hugo Chavez (former Venezuelan president): “Thanks Hugo Chavez for showing that the poor matter and wealth can be shared“.

Irish Republican Army: From 1986 to 1992, Corbyn spoke annually at Sands/Connolly (Bobby and James) commemorations in London to show support for IRA “prisoners of war” and remember the IRA dead.

Does he support Hamas/Hezbollah’s antisemitism or does he just ignore it as he does his other favourites?

Jeremy Corbyn celebrated Passover (in St Peter’s de Beauvoir church in Hackney!) with radical as-a-Jew group Jewdas known for its far-left anti-Zionism, scandalising just about every other Jewish group. Jewdas dismisses talk of antisemitism in party as “faux-outrage greased with hypocrisy and opportunism” that is “the work of cynical manipulations by people whose express loyalty is to the Conservative Party and the right wing of the Labour Party” so undoubtedly he felt at home.

An intriguing question is what was going on in Corbyn’s mind when he decided to accept Jewdas’s (as in Judas?) invitation for a Pessach (Passover) seder. The organisation is an offensive joke. Check out their membership application.

Already facing accusations of antisemitism in his party, did he think attending their mockery of a religious ceremony would reconcile him to the rest of Britain’s Jewish community? Did he think this group was representative of that community? Did he see a group whose opinions, (Israel as “a streaming pile of sewage which needs to be disposed of.”) on Israel came close to his own and that was enough?

Is this just a case of proving he wasn’t antisemitic by finding a tiny, unrepresentative Jewish group and saying, See, there are Jews who agree with me”? Neturei Karta for the far-left? Is he that clever?

Is it possible that a man with ambitions to become Prime Minister has so little sense of irony that he doesn’t realise Jewdas was hardly a serious organisation?

A second attempt to address the wider Jewish community at the Jewish Museum was probably a better idea. It fell through. According to the Independent

“the museum entered talks with Labour having assumed that the organisations had all agreed to attend the event.

However, when museum officials contacted them to discuss it, the groups said they had had no communication with Mr Corbyn’s team and knew nothing about the planned event.”

“Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity”*. Not sure about ‘never’.

† If you didn’t pick up the avian reference.The Corbyn surname may have derived as a nickname for a man with strikingly glossy black hair or for one with a raucous voice, from the Middle English or the Old French “Corbin” Corbun”, raven.
‡ I prefer ‘Jew Hater’ to ‘antisemite’ because it avoids the ridiculous ‘Arabs are also Semites’, claim. By that argument Adolf Hitler was not an antisemite. Please reread I am not an antisemite! Where have all the Jew Haters gone?, one of my earlier efforts. I believe it is still completely relevant.
* Hanlon’s razor

]]>https://jewsdownunder.com/2018/08/10/is-jeremy-corbyn-an-antisemite/feed/223150From Israel: Deplorable!!https://jewsdownunder.com/2018/08/10/from-israel-deplorable-2/
https://jewsdownunder.com/2018/08/10/from-israel-deplorable-2/#respondFri, 10 Aug 2018 11:53:41 +0000https://jewsdownunder.com/?p=23146We should ask ourselves, again, and again, how we got into the situation in which we have found ourselves. The question is of key importance, because the situation is intolerable. After months of enduring violence at the fence and ever greater numbers of incendiary devices launched from Gaza, after the murder of one IDF officer …

We should ask ourselves, again, and again, how we got into the situation in which we have found ourselves. The question is of key importance, because the situation is intolerable.

After months of enduring violence at the fence and ever greater numbers of incendiary devices launched from Gaza, after the murder of one IDF officer with a high power rifle and the wounding of another, after talk in Israel of finally launching war against Hamas – talk that never materialized, Egypt and the UN came forward with a complex ceasefire plan.

~~~~~~~~~~

When last I wrote, the signs were that this formalized ceasefire plan was going nowhere. This did not displease me in the slightest for several important reasons:

AFP/Said Khaled.

The plan felt like a reward for terror. Hamas promoted violence at the fence and the launching of incendiary devices into Israel, and instead of being put down for this behavior, they were about to secure relief: open crossings with merchandise coming through, more electricity, etc. etc. It would be a “win” for them – something they badly needed. And it would deliver precisely the wrong message.

And then: A cease-fire with an “expiration date” – in this instance five years – is a farce, based upon Muslim practice. What does it mean? That in five years and one day it is OK for Hamas to attack again? Either Hamas wants a peaceful situation and is willing to accept a ceasefire with intentions of working to make it permanent, or Hamas should admit it does not want peace. (It does not.)

The perks that would accrue to Hamas during this five year period would only take the pressure off them and provide an opportunity for planning, and strengthening, towards the day of the next attack. How sensible is it to allow this? There was talk of a seaport being constructed for Gaza in the Sinai. What were the guarantees that military equipment would not be smuggled in via this port?

Reports continued to emerge of the differences between the military wing of Hamas, which wants war, and the political wing, which is looking for that ceasefire.

How stable would a ceasefire be, given this situation, with the very people who launch the rockets not truly on board?

We are not talking about a democracy in which the military takes its orders from the political leadership.

There remained the very amorphous question of how the Palestinian Authority fit into this equation. This only added to the inherent instability of the situation.

~~~~~~~~~~

Then, late Tuesday, within a very short time after I wrote (how often this happens, with the situation so volatile!) the picture began to shift dramatically.

The Hamas political leadership, which had gathered in Gaza in its entirety for the first time to deliberate on the question of whether to accept the plan, had completed discussions.

IBN

Now they were headed to Cairo to consult with the Egyptians. Very quickly leaks began to emerge indicating that Hamas was eager for the ceasefire plan.

Wednesday night Hamas released a document highlighting main points that had been agreed upon. Key among these – and of considerable importance – was the determination to deny Israel military freedom in the area: Israel would not be permitted to “impose new rules of conflict.”

Additionally, there would be no renunciation either of weapons or of the resistance.

So they were saying it quite plainly: They will call the shots militarily, hold on to their weapons, and continue on the path of working towards taking down Israel.

There has been much publicity about the need for Israel to demand, as part of a ceasefire, the release of the bodies of our two soldiers and the two Israeli civilians held by Hamas. What is more, it was being said that Israel must demand this up-front, as an initial condition of the ceasefire.

Hamas, however, has something else in mind: The soldiers’ bodies and the two civilians have been held as bargaining chips.

In 2011, in a terrible deal, Israel released over 1,000 Hamas prisoners in order to secure the release of IDF soldier Gilad Shalit. Many of those released were rearrested because of a return to terrorist acts, or suspected involvement in such acts (following the kidnapping and murder of the three Israeli teenagers in 2014). Hamas wants to secure their release.

This is not an acceptable state of affairs. Hamas must be made to hurt so badly that they agree to release the bodies and the civilians with no quid pro quo.

~~~~~~~~~~

In any event, according to the reports that were leaked, and repeated in the Turkish press, mediated talks between Hamas and Israel regarding the plan were in “advanced stages.” Israel’s Security Cabinet was supposed to meet on Thursday to discuss the deal and provide a response.

~~~~~~~~~~

The Jewish Star.

Wednesday night, however, all hell broke loose with a significant attack from Hamas. Overnight and through the day on Thursday the better part of 200 projectiles were launched. People in some Israeli communities near the border spent the night in shelters. Sirens shrilled frequently. The mother directly below was shielding her baby in response to a siren.

People were injured during the attacks – thankfully, no one was killed. Homes and property were damaged as well.

~~~~~~~~~~

Israel National News

The Israel Air Force then responded inside Gaza, hitting in all some 140 targets.

I will not provide details of that attack because in a sense I feel they do not matter. A map was released showing the location of a tunnel we hit. After a rocket was launched that reached Be’ersheva – the first time since 2014, we leveled a building said to be used as Hamas headquarters. (This happened two hours after an alleged truce.) On it went.

There was a time when this sort of attack seemed impressive to me, but it no longer does: I have come to understand that Hamas expects this and withstands it. It does not substantially affect them.

~~~~~~~~~~

Into the night last night the Security Cabinet deliberated on what to do next: war or no war? What kind of war?

For many of us watching into the night, we sensed that this was finally it: we were going to move to war.

For the first time, from a variety of sources — including from the mayor of Sderot, which takes the brunt of Hamas attacks — came calls for that war. There was even a small demonstration outside Ministry of Defense Headquarters in Tel Aviv as the Security Cabinet was deliberating.

Among those cited was Major-General (Res.) Uzi Dayan, former deputy chief of staff and former head of the National Security Council – a man who understands and does not fool around.

Said Dayan (emphasis added):

I hope there will be an operation in Gaza. This is something that needs to be done because our deterrence has been eroded to a point.

“Even if there is a kind of ceasefire, Hamas will continue to operate below the threshold of response, to send kites and balloons, on the assumption that we will respond only with a small response, and even if it sends eighty rockets to the Gaza vicinity like yesterday, Israel will not launch an operation. This is called the loss of deterrence.”

This was mildly reassuring, as it seemed to indicate that no formal ceasefire agreement had been reached. But what I observed is that these were REACTIVE instructions: Hit them if they act up. Hamas, in essence, was still calling the shots.

Wasn’t that one of the goals of the Hamas leaders, enunciated after their meeting in Gaza? They would “not allow” Israel military freedom of action.

Well, it is not to Hamas to “allow” our position. It is up to Israel to take a position. And this is where we are failing in a significant way.

As I write, early afternoon Israel time, what is referred to as an “uneasy calm” has descended over the area. Some of the precautions issued to residents of the communities adjacent to Gaza have been lifted – which suggests there is no expectation in the short run of further violence. This is unquestionably a simple informal truce, not a formal long-term ceasefire.

But to many of us even this is simply unacceptable! It is time for Israel to take offensive action, and to regain deterrence. Sentiment for action within Israel is growing rapidly.

~~~~~~~~~~

I have picked up information about grouping of IDF forces near Gaza, and so while there is a temporary, informal truce, there is also the expectation that this may fall apart. The question is, what happens then? Do we continue on the same unending cycle, simply reacting? Or do we go into Gaza for a major offensive operation, to deliver a massage to Hamas at last??

~~~~~~~~~~

Uzi Dayan and many others say that nothing short of destroying the Hamas regime will do.

But if our Security Cabinet is not ready for this yet (in the end there may be no choice), there is still offensive action that might be taken immediately that would break the current cycle. There is the possibility of targeted assassinations of Hamas leaders, which sets them badly off balance.

I read last night about the idea that we might do a short term very intensive bombing of the elite neighborhoods of Gaza city, which is where the leaders are located. This would hurt them in a more direct fashion. Other creative approaches are possible.

I am simply weary to distraction of the chest-thumping statements by our people:

“We are prepared for any eventuality.”

“We know how to act when we have to.”

Hamas knows these are just words. As Seth Frantzman of the JPost put it:

“Jerusalem’s toothless warnings have become quotidian.”

It’s time to stop talking and show them.

~~~~~~~~~~

Before closing, I do want to share this from Ron Ben Yisahai, as cited by the Jewish Press:

“In Israel, both in the political echelon and in the security echelons and the IDF, it is estimated that the ‘big deal’ with Hamas will not happen in the near future.”

That’s not because Israel doesn’t want it, but because, what can you do, Hamas doesn’t want it, apparently.

“The five-year ‘hudna’ (ceasefire), which has been discussed in recent weeks by the Arab and Western media, is not even close to being achieved by the Egyptian mediators and the UN envoy.”

This explains what I spoke about the other day: that if the UN envoy went on vacation, this was indication that nothing was going to happen.

Ben Yishai continues (emphasis added):

“The detailed reports about it were nothing more than psychological warfare on the part of the mediators and Hamas, to create the impression that Hamas was prepared for a long-term and stable truce if all its demands were met – without any concessions on its part.”

“We Have Legal Grounds” –

]]>https://jewsdownunder.com/2018/08/10/from-israel-deplorable-2/feed/023146INTO THE FRAY: Gaza – Liberman gets an “F”https://jewsdownunder.com/2018/08/10/into-the-fray-gaza-liberman-gets-an-f/
https://jewsdownunder.com/2018/08/10/into-the-fray-gaza-liberman-gets-an-f/#respondThu, 09 Aug 2018 23:59:27 +0000https://jewsdownunder.com/?p=23143Liberman’s appointment as Defense Minister ignited expectations of a qualitatively different approach to that of his predecessor—one discernibly more robust and resolute… Sadly, this was not to be Shortly after Avigdor Liberman was appointed Defense Minister, two Palestinian-Arab terrorists cut down almost a dozen customers at a well-known coffee shop located a few hundred yards …

]]>Liberman’s appointment as Defense Minister ignited expectations of aqualitatively different approach to that of his predecessor—onediscernibly more robust and resolute…Sadly, this was not to be

Shortly after Avigdor Liberman was appointed Defense Minister, two Palestinian-Arab terrorists cut down almost a dozen customers at a well-known coffee shop located a few hundred yards from the Ministry of Defense and IDF HQ in Tel Aviv, killing four and wounding the rest.

Times of Israel.

Sadly symbolic
In many ways, this incident was a predictive symbol of things to come. For it foretold that much of the hopes pinned on Liberman were to be unfounded, showing that his hawkish, machoistic rhetoric had done little to deter the determination of Palestinian-Arabs to kill Jews.

Readers will recall that, after refusing to join Netanyahu’s coalition for a year—thus strengthening, at least passively, the Left-wing opposition—Liberman managed to extort his way into the plum position of Defense Minister—despite his party’s dismal performance in the 2015 election, in which it lost almost half its Knesset seats, underscoring the perversity of the Israeli political process.

His appointment as Defense Minister, in place of the then-incumbent Lt-Gen (res) Moshe “Bogey” Yaalon, who many saw as being overly reticent in dealing with Palestinian terror, ignited expectations of a qualitatively different approach to that of his predecessor—one discernibly more robust and resolute; more assertive and aggressive.

Sadly, this was not to be.

True, there have been some impressive operations against Iranian targets in the North, and the defense establishment, which Liberman heads, deserves considerable credit for the operational and intelligence capability they have demonstrated. But limited attacks on specific targets, however impressive, are not indications of an overall strategic blueprint—not regarding the northern front (including the formidable capabilities of Hezbollah) and certainly not in the South, which has—both literally and figuratively—been set ablaze by the terror regime that rules the hapless coastal enclave.

The immorality of “restraint”

It was Ariel Sharon, the perpetrator of the disastrously failed unilateral evacuation of Gaza in 2005, who coined the unfortunate phrase “Restraint is strength”, to justify his inaction against Palestinian-Arab terror—until the gory 2002 massacre at the Park Hotel in the seaside resort of Netanya, forced his hand to undertake Operation Defensive Shield.

Of course, there may be some merit in this approach of restraint if one’s adversary perceives it as a benign gesture of magnanimity from a considerably more powerful antagonist, which elicits a conciliatory counter-gesture on the way to an amicable resolution of the conflict between them.

If however, it is perceived instead as a sign of weakness, providing only an opportunity for further violence, it has no such merit. To the contrary, it is even detrimental and counterproductive.

The latter is indisputably the case with regard to the Palestinian-Arabs, in general, and to Hamas in Gaza, in particular.

In such circumstances, restraint is a policy not only devoid of any practical merit; it is also devoid of any moral merit. For it does nothing but put Israeli civilians at risk.

On Thursday morning, Israel awoke to the news that “restraint” had almost killed a group of children, when an incoming rocket from Gaza narrowly missed the park in which they were playing. This follows another incident, several weeks ago, when a rocket landed in a kindergarten, fortunately still empty as it hit just before it opened for the day.

The ruinous results of restraint

Just how unwise a policy of “restraint” has proved to be is clearly underscored by events on the ground.

While Israel has practiced “restraint”, the Islamists of Gaza have frenetically upgraded their offensive capacities beyond anyone’s worst fears, when in 2005, Israel abandoned Gaza.

While Israel showed “restraint”, Hamas enhanced the range of their missile arsenal from a maximum of 5 km to 100 km; and their explosive charge from 500 grams to 100 kg.

While Israel demonstrated “restraint”, Hamas excavated a maze of terror tunnels, developed naval forces, devised incendiary kites that have devastated thousands of acres of farmland, forests and nature reserves, and is now acquiring drone capabilities that are likely to neutralize, at least partially, the multi-billion shekel, anti-tunnel barrier along the Gaza border.

It has been suggested that Israel has shown restraint in the South because it considers the northern front a potentially great threat, which needs to be focused on prior to large scale action in Gaza.

This argument is both troubling and unsound—almost self-contradictory.

After all, if the major concern is the North, surely operational logic would dictate that the IDF neutralize the threat in the South as quickly as possible, rather than allow it to drag on for months, so that if the northern front erupts, it would not have to fight on two fronts at once. After all, the policy of restraint virtually ensures that Hamas will retain its military prowess practically intact and could put them to use at any time of its own choosing. And what could be a more opportune time to do so than if/when fighting in the North flares up.

Thus, if anything, the specter of a two-front confrontation militates towards abandoning restraint in favor of more robust and resolute action that could obviate the prospective problem before it emerges.

Gaza: Problem is conceptual not operational

The problem of Israel’s strategy towards Gaza (or lack thereof) is conceptual, not operational. After all, it is difficult to believe that, in the absence of political/diplomatic constraints, the IDF could not overrun Gaza within in days. Indeed, if it cannot, that would be deeply disturbing.

Thus, the fact that such a course is not adopted is not due to operational limitations. Rather it is due to Israel still being captive to the idea—or rather illusion—that at some stage, the Palestinian-Arabs will, contrary to all existing evidence, emerge as a prospective peace partner. Accordingly, any measures likely wreak excessive devastation on them are avoided—so as not jeopardize the chances of future reconciliation.

This claim could, of course, be refuted by historical precedents, where reconciliation was only achieved after one side had inflicted unacceptable damage on the other, coercing it to admit defeat and surrender.

However, even if some of these examples are not relevant for the Israel-Palestinian conflict, one thing is clear: The policy of restraint has failed unequivocally to induce anything vaguely resembling a desired response from Hamas. Indeed, all it has done is to provide the terror organization an opportunity to become an increasingly formidable threat to Israel and its citizens.

Clearly then, the time has come to abandon “restraint” as the dominant element in Israeli policy toward Gaza and Israel must base its policy on what the Palestinian-Arabs really are—and declare themselves to be—not on what it would like them to be. Accordingly, Israel must relate to the Palestinian-Arabs, not as a prospective peace partner, but as an implacable enemy, bent on its destruction, for whom “restraint” is merely a respite, in which to hone its hostility.

The question of “collateral casualties”

The inevitable conclusion of all this is that far more drastic military measures are called for to resolve the Gaza issue.

It is, of course, easy to advocate such coercive action from the air-conditioned comfort of my home. This, however, does not make the need for it any less compelling—especially for the folk in the distinctly less amenable conditions in the farms, villages and towns adjacent to Gaza.

The prospect of the use of large-scale military action inevitably raises the question of collateral civilian casualties. In this regard, the larger civilian population is invariably portrayed as the hapless victim of its tyrannical terrorist leadership. This is a grave misrepresentation of reality, for as I have pointed our repeatedly in the past (see for example here and here) the wider Gaza population is the crucible in which that leadership was formed and from which it emerged, not its victim.

This is not to say that efforts should not be made to reduce unintended harm to non-belligerents. They certainly should! However, unless the Government of Israel places a higher value on Palestinian casualties than on Israeli ones, collateral damage among the enemy population cannot be an overriding operational constraint on military action intended to bring lasting security to the residents of the South.

Reversal of causality

Sadly, the tone of the current discourse seems to tend toward conferring some kind of benefits on Gaza in return of a cessation of hostilities.

In a world of reason and decency this should be unthinkable! Indeed, to reward, rather than punish Hamas for its aggression would be both counter-productive and immoral. Moreover, this has been the pattern in previous campaigns—and has produced only continued and escalating hostility. To repeat such folly would be almost criminally obtuse.

Sadly, most of the discourse on Gaza is hopelessly ensnared on what Benjamin Netanyahu once referred to as a “reversal of causality”. For, contrary to widely held perceptions, the dire socio-economic conditions in the terror-ruled enclave are not the cause of the anti-Israel antipathy that festers there; it is festering anti-Israel antipathy that is the cause of these dire socio-economic conditions.

The penury and privation in Gaza is the product of choices made by Gazans, not a fate imposed on it by Israel. They are inherent to the Judeophobic political aspirations of the Palestinian-Arabs and Israel should not be called on to reconcile itself to them and certainly not to reward them.

One might be excused for expecting that as Defense Minister, Liberman would be leading the way in expounding such a viewpoint.

What must be done

The recent resurgence of violence from Gaza, coupled with the accumulated experience of the last quarter-century—and the growing presence of Jihadi elements in adjoining Sinai—leads to the inevitable conclusion, however unpalatable: Israel can only determine who controls Gaza—and what emanates from Gaza—if it controls Gaza itself.

The only way it can do this while avoiding the need for indefinitely ruling over “another people” is to relocate the “other people”—with generous funding—to promote the emigration of non-belligerent Gazans to third party countries—which certainly seems a more humane outcome than allowing them to languish in their current condition.

This is clearly a sharp departure from conventional wisdom and a massive public diplomacy offensive—as I have long advocated—to facilitate its implementation will be required—conveying why incentivized emigration imperative; what staggering sacrifices Israel has made—to no avail—in trying alternative avenues; and explaining why refraining from such relocation and rehabilitation will only precipitate further tragedy and trauma for Jew and Arab alike.

Of course, along with the positive inducements to leave, Israel will have to institute negative disincentives for staying, by announcing that it will gradually deny the supply of all services to non-Israeli populations. After all, if continued supply of utilities is used to endanger Israeli civilians, it is clearly immoral to persist with such supply.

The bleak choice: Arabs in Gaza or Jews in Negev

The bitter truth is that unless there is a dramatic change in the approach to Gaza, the current pattern of recurring violence will continue to escalate—and the Jewish residents of the south are unlikely to endure these realities indefinitely.

Accordingly, the bleak choice facing the Israeli leadership is this. There will either be Arabs in Gaza or Jews in the Negev. There will not be both!

If Defense Minister Liberman does not grasp this and act accordingly, he is unlikely to improve his current grade of “F”.

]]>https://jewsdownunder.com/2018/08/10/into-the-fray-gaza-liberman-gets-an-f/feed/023143The Sbarro bombers have been paid $294,332 by the Palestinian Authority .https://jewsdownunder.com/2018/08/09/the-sbarro-bombers-have-been-paid-294332-by-the-palestinian-authority/
https://jewsdownunder.com/2018/08/09/the-sbarro-bombers-have-been-paid-294332-by-the-palestinian-authority/#respondThu, 09 Aug 2018 13:04:18 +0000https://jewsdownunder.com/?p=2313517 years ago today a suicide bomber entered the Sbarro pizza shop in downtown Jerusalem, detonated his suicide vest and murdered 15 people. The murdered in the August 9, 2001 bombing included 7 children as well as a couple and three of their children, an American citizen and a Brazilian citizen. (See their names and …

]]>17 years ago today a suicide bomber entered the Sbarro pizza shop in downtown Jerusalem, detonated his suicide vest and murdered 15 people. The murdered in the August 9, 2001 bombing included 7 children as well as a couple and three of their children, an American citizen and a Brazilian citizen. (See their names and pictures below.) 130 people were injured.

The suicide bomber was Izz al-Din Al-Masri. His family has received $50,124 as a reward for his suicide bombing.

The terrorist who planned the attack and brought the bomber to Sbarro was Ahlam Tamimi. Tamimi was arrested in September 2001 and received 16 life sentences. In 2011, Tamimi was released as part of the deal to free Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit from his Hamas captors. For her time in prison she has been rewarded by the PA with salary payments of at least $52,681.

The suicide belt was built by Hamas bomb- builder Abdallah Barghouti. Barghouti was arrested in May 2003, and received 67 life sentences – 15 of them for building the bomb used to murder the people in Sbarro. He has received salary payments from the PA of at least $191,526.

By September 2018, the PA will have cumulatively rewarded Barghouti, Tamimi, and the family of Al-Masri with at least $294,332.

PA law mandates that every terrorist imprisoned by Israel receive a monthly salary for the full duration of his/her time in prison and often even after his/her release. The PA also pays monthly allowances to the families of terrorist so-called “Martyrs.” By declaring a murderer as a “Martyr”, the PA is saying that he did an exemplary act according to Islam, for which he will be rewarded in the afterlife by Allah.

In an interview filmed while she was still in prison, proud terrorist Tamimi explained:

Israeli interviewer:

“Who chose Sbarro [as the target]?”

Tamimi:

“I did. For nine days I examined the place very carefully and chose it after seeing the large number of patrons at the Sbarro restaurant. I didn’t want to blow [myself] up, I didn’t want to carry out a Martyrdom-seeking operation (i.e., a suicide attack). My mission was just to choose the place and to bring the Martyrdom-seeker (i.e., the suicide bomber). [I made] the general plan of the operation, but carrying it out was entrusted to the Martyrdom-seeker. … I told him to enter the restaurant, eat a meal, and then after 15 minutes carry out the Martyrdom-seeking operation.

During the quarter of an hour I would return the same way that I had arrived. Then I bade him farewell. He went inside, he crossed the road and went to the restaurant, and I went back the way I had come… You have to know something: a Martyrdom-seeker has a very special character, and I was amazed at his great wish to carry out the operation, his great wish to pass over to a different life. How beautiful it is when you make a person – [starts the sentence again] [Suppose] there’s a poor person and you give him a lot of money. He will be happy and you yourself will be happy that you realized for him the happy life that he wanted. My job was to realize, for this Martyrdom-seeker, the happy life that he wanted.”

Israeli interviewer:

“Didn’t you think about the people who were in the restaurant? The children? The families?”

Tamimi:

“No.”

“I have no regrets, and no Palestinian prisoner regrets what he or she has done. We were defending ourselves. What are we supposed to regret? Should we regret defending ourselves? Should we regret that the Israelis killed one of us so we killed a different one of them? We have no regrets.”

Israeli interviewer:

“Do you know how many children were killed in the restaurant?”

Tamimi:

“Three children were killed in the operation, I think. [Smiles.]”

Israeli interviewer:

“Eight.”

Tamimi:“Eight?! [Smiles.] Eight.”

[Official PA TV, Oct. 23, 2011]

Since her release in the Shalit deal, Tamimi lives in Jordan. Tamimi has repeatedly stated that she does not regret her involvement in the terror attack. When asked in an interview broadcast on a Jordanian website if she would participate in or carry out another terror attack, she responded:

[Official PA TV, Oct. 23, 2011]

“Of course. I don’t regret what happened, absolutely not. That is the path; I give myself for the sake of Allah, to Jihad for Allah. I carried out [my mission] and Allah made me successful: You know the number of victims who were killed. All that was thanks to the success from Allah. Do you expect me to abandon what I did, saying [I regret it]? Regret is something that is out of the question. If time could go backwards, I would carry out what I did, in the same manner.”

[ammonnews.net (Jordanian website), Oct. 19, 2011]

An American request to Jordan to extradite Tamimi to the US was rejected. Today she is on the FBI’s Most Wanted Terrorist list.

The 2004 PA law of Prisoners and Released Prisoners, in addition to codifying in law the PA practices of paying salaries to prisoners, conditions the signing of any peace agreement on the release of all Palestinian terrorist prisoners, including mass murderers like Adballah Barghouti.

]]>https://jewsdownunder.com/2018/08/09/the-sbarro-bombers-have-been-paid-294332-by-the-palestinian-authority/feed/023135Oz Torah: Ask the Rabbi – Divorcehttps://jewsdownunder.com/2018/08/09/oz-torah-ask-the-rabbi-divorce/
https://jewsdownunder.com/2018/08/09/oz-torah-ask-the-rabbi-divorce/#respondWed, 08 Aug 2018 21:20:18 +0000https://jewsdownunder.com/?p=23130APPRECIATING THE TREES. Q. I was puzzled when I read in Pir’kei Avot that if a person is walking along rehearsing his studies and stops to look at a tree and remarks, “How beautiful that tree is!” deserves to lose his life. What has he or she done wrong? A. The saying is in Pir’kei …

Q. I was puzzled when I read in Pir’kei Avot that if a person is walking along rehearsing his studies and stops to look at a tree and remarks, “How beautiful that tree is!” deserves to lose his life. What has he or she done wrong?

A. The saying is in Pir’kei Avot 3:7. There are different versions of who said it but regardless of the name of the author, there can be no objection to a person praising a tree or any other part of nature.

Nature’s grandeur reveals the greatness of God. There are b’rachot to say when one sees something beautiful.

So what is the sin in taking a walk and acclaiming the trees?

The clue is in the opening words of the passage,

“A person is walking by the way and rehearsing his studies…”.

When you study Torah you should be concentrating. If you are easily distracted, you have a problem and need to do something about it.

The sage quoted in Pir’kei Avot does not actually say that the person concerned deserves to die; what he says is “mit’chayyev b’nafsho” – “he jeopardises his life (literally, his soul)”. Letting one’s mind be diverted is bad for the mind and soul.

However, the Ba’al Shem Tov, who spent years of his life communing with the outdoors, has another approach. He quotes a verse from the story of Noah, “Tzohar ta’aseh latevah” – “make an opening for light in the ark” (Gen. 6:16).

He points out that “tevah” sometimes means “a word” and he therefore reads the verse as if it said, “Make an opening for light in every word that you speak“.

If, then, one thinks of a tree as a source of inspiration, the tree is no longer an interruption but an integral part of one’s learning.

DIVORCE.

Q. What is the Jewish view of divorce?

A. Judaism would of course prefer every marriage to be solid, stable and lasting, but it accepts that not every marriage succeeds, and in such cases it is better to bring the chapter to a polite and tidy end.

We do say, “When a couple divorce, even the altar in the Temple sheds tears” (Gittin 90b).

But the Torah teaches (Deut. 24) that when divorce is necessary it should take place.

A couple should keep working on their marriage and not lightly resort to the divorce courts.

I have to say that have seen divorces happen when the couple should and could have worked harder on finding a modus vivendi.

“Gett” – Jewish divorce.

One of the tragedies is that people don’t always realise that they are unlikely to find the perfect partner, nor is anyone likely to be the perfect partner… but the marriage can still work. It takes time, tolerance (and maybe tears) to find and enjoy each other’s good points and learn to live with and rise above their less good points.

Yes, there are still problems when a husband refuses a “chained” woman a divorce, but these issues are high up on the rabbinic agenda.

HERETICS WITHOUT CHOLENT.

Q. Why did Jews develop such an indigestible food as cholent?

Editor. “If you haven’t tried it..you must. Delicious”

A. Cholent (pronounced “tsholent”) is a stew that simmers overnight on Friday in order to have hot food on Shabbat.

The word may be from the French “chaud” (“warm”), a corruption of the German words “shule ende” (“end of synagogue services”), or from the Hebrew “sheyalin” (“that which stays overnight”).

Though many people insist that cholent needs meat, it is quite feasible to have a tasty vegetarian cholent.

Not everyone, however, would go as far as Rabbi Yehudah ben Barzillai of Barcelona who says in his Sefer HaIttim,

“He who does not eat chamin (cholent) on Shabbat should be excommunicated. He should be removed from the community of Israel.”

~~

Rabbi Apple served for 32 years as the chief minister of the Great Synagogue, Sydney, Australia’s oldest and most prestigious congregation. He was Australia’s highest profile rabbi and held many public roles. He is now retired and lives in Jerusalem. Rabbi Apple blogs at http://www.oztorah.com

]]>https://jewsdownunder.com/2018/08/09/oz-torah-ask-the-rabbi-divorce/feed/023130Amazon Selling “Make Israel Palestine Again” T-Shirts.https://jewsdownunder.com/2018/08/08/amazon-selling-make-israel-palestine-again-t-shirts/
https://jewsdownunder.com/2018/08/08/amazon-selling-make-israel-palestine-again-t-shirts/#respondWed, 08 Aug 2018 12:33:27 +0000https://jewsdownunder.com/?p=23128Amazon.com is selling T-shirts that say “Make Israel Palestine Again,” a not so subtle endorsement of ending the State of Israel. The shirts are listed as “In Stock. Ships from and sold by Amazon.com.” This stands in contrast with some merchandise Amazon sells that comes from third-party sources. Similar shirts are available on Etsy.com. …

]]>Amazon.com is selling T-shirts that say “Make Israel Palestine Again,” a not so subtle endorsement of ending the State of Israel. The shirts are listed as “In Stock. Ships from and sold by Amazon.com.”

This stands in contrast with some merchandise Amazon sells that comes from third-party sources.

The slogan “Make Israel Palestine Again” is used often on social media, including a Twitter page and an Instagram account. An image on the Twitter feed shows President Trump wearing a “Make America GreatAgain” hat Photoshopped to say “Make Israel Palestine Again.”

Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) activist Miko Peled used the Trump-style “Make Israel Palestine Again” hat as his Twitter avatar and in a November 2016 post. Peled linked to a petition that calls Israel’s existence into question.

The BDS movement aims to isolate Israel politically and economically using sanctions and boycotts of Israeli goods.

Zazzle.com, a website that allows people to create items with their own messages and sell them, hosts a store belonging to the U.S. Campaign for Palestinian Rights (USCPR). Its store lets people buy merchandise emblazoned with the USCPR’s logo.

Tax records show the USCPR acts as the U.S.-based financial agent for the BDS National Committee – the group responsible for coordinating the BDS movement worldwide. The BDS National Committee counts a group called the Council of National and Islamic Force in Palestine –a coalition that includes representatives from Hamas and other terrorist groups – as a member organization.

Amazon corporate communications did not respond to an email seeking comment.